Laserfiche WebLink
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MARCH 5, 2013 <br /> <br />Page 3 of 9 <br /> <br />MOTION: Mayor Pearson moved TO MOVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 7 & 8 TO AFTER ITEM 11 FOR <br />DISCUSSION. Council Member Smith seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED 5-0. <br /> <br /> <br />MOTION: Council Member Smith moved TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS AMENDED. <br />Council Member Park seconded the motion. MOTION PASSED 5-0. <br /> <br />REGULAR AGENDA <br />ITEM 9: ADOPTION OF STANDARD DEVELOPER’S AGREEMENT; RESOLUTION 2013-16 City Engineer Griffin explained the standard developer’s agreement. He noted everyone who worked on it. The agreement was presented to council at workshop. Council Member Nelson asked about letter of credit. Snyder stated it did not need to be specifically mentioned in agreement. Staff can note that in the approval checklist. It was explained that it is the baseline agreement and can be modified as needed. Nelson asked about recording and the use of “may” language. City Attorney Snyder stated that it is always done. <br />MOTION: Council Member Smith moved TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2013-16, ADOPTING THE <br />STANDARD FORM OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. Council Member Bloyer seconded the motion. <br />MOTION PASSED 5-0. <br />ITEM 10: SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS RELATED TO PUBLIC LAND DEDICATION; <br />ORDINANCE 08-072, RESOLUTION 2013-17, FEE SCHEDULE AMENDMENT Planning Director Klatt presented summary of subdivision ordinance amendments. Mr. Klatt explained the differences. Residential districts will remain at 10%. The new urban districts that Council has adopted require the update to the ordinance. The new districts will also be at 10% dedication. Council had recommended at the recent workshop to set a fee as opposed to percentage of land for commercial. Mr. Klatt explained need to revise the fee schedule by resolution. The proposed fee is $4500 commercial. Council Member Bloyer asked about reviewing fees yearly. It was explained by staff that it was City practice to review annually. Discussion was had about the 4 or more lots versus 3 or less for commercial. Council Member Smith explained the reasoning for not following the Parks Comm. recommendation. She explained the process and noted that it will be reviewed every year. Council Member Bloyer asked about fee amendments and when it can be done. It can be done as needed. There is no waiting requirement.